A Five Year Lighting Contract Passes

At the councu meeting on Monday evening business of importance was transacted. The mayor's nomination of Daniel J. Ross as member of the board of public works in place of Jacob F. Schuh, whose time was expired, was approved. The report of the boerd of public works on the Herman Hutzel claim, allowing only $516 of the amount of the claim, was adopted and a warrant ordered drawn, only to be paid if accepted by Mr. Hutzel in full for his claim. Aldermen Allmendinger, Koch and Laubengayer voted no, and Alderman Butterfield was excused from voting. A petition of George Spathelf and others was presented, asking that an iron fence be placed about the north side pump. Aid. Butterfield, who filled the chair in the absence of Pres. Hiscock, thought it should be referred to the water committee. On motion of Aid. Brown the petition was referred to the board of public works. The finance tee reported bilis to the amount of $8,850.45, which were allowed. The lighting committee reported in favor of giving the Michigan Electric company, of Detroit, a five years' contract on its bid, the bond being raised to $10,000 and the lighting to corje up to Prof. Carhart's standard. The commiitee further reported that the Ann Arbor Thompson-Houston Electric company offered to take a two years' contract on the basis of the Porter bid for lighting to 12:30 a. m., at $64.25 per lamp. The recommendation of the committee to give the contract to the Michigan Electric company, the lowest bid, was adopted, Aid. Snyder, Laubengayer, Taylor and Butterfield voting no. The motion that a contract be entered into with this company was adopted, only Aid. Butterfield voting no. Aid. Taylor offered a resolution that two road graders and two road scrapers be purchased. The pungent debate which followed showed that at least some of the aldermen are beginning to realize that the people will hold them accountablt for their great expenditures. Aid Brown questioned the advisability of investing in more machinery a this time of the year. Aid. Taylor said they could not use the steam roller without the graders anc scrapers. Aid. Brown asked if after these were purchased still more machinery would be purchased. Aid. Taylor suggested a sprinkling cart. Aid. Koch thought they had better go slow, as he thought the council was criticised enough without giving the people more cause. Aid. Snyder thought the machines would save work. It was foolish economy not to buy the machines at the present time. The graders were absolutely necessary. Aid. Koch s#id if the statement made that of $700 paid out for labor góoo could be saved by these machines, was true, he did not believe in their purchase. He favored less machines and more labor done. Aid. Laubengayer said they had spent enough for the steam roller. They had better see what it would do before buying more machinery. Aid. Maynard asked what one scraper would cost. He would vote for one, but not for two. Aid. Taylor said he had put down two in his resolution to hear them talk. Aid. Coon saidthis council had received the reputation of being the most expensive one in years, and it was time to cali a halt. Aid. Koch thought tqe next thing would be that they would want to put $1,000 in a building to house the machinery. Aid. Maynard moved as an amendment that one grader be purchased, and no scraper. Carned. Yeas, Aid. Maynard, Allmendinger, Koch, Snyder, Brown, Shadford, Butterfield, and Cady - 8. Nays, Aid. Moore, Laubengayer, Taylor, and Coon - 4. Aid. Koch moved as as a substitute that the purchase be postponed until next spring. Lost by a viva voce vote. Aid. Coon said that when the steam roller was purchased it was argued that no further expense would be required, but it seems thaj was not the case. The motion as amended for the purchase of one grader then passed, only Aid. Koch, Laubengayer and Coon voting no. The aldermen then feit so elated over the purchase of another machine that they promptly adiourned.